I have been asked to make a buckler.(4 actually)
I have the dimensions, but is the edge rolled to the front or to the back?
The sample I was shown was from valantine armouries and the edge rolled to the back( It was smaller than the guy wanted)
Historically I dont know and can't tell from the pic's I have seen.
It seems to me though that rolled to the front would be better, blocking a thrust, the sword tip could bind/hang up in the rolled edge instead of just glancing off.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Hello all!

Garth,

This isn't a buckler with a rolled edge as such, but I found an interesting Welsh buckler on the Royal Armouries web site. It has a surface that would definitely bind or catch a sword point, with it's concentric rings. Apparently catching the point did have its benefits (rendering the opponent momentarily unable to strike, or something similar), at least for this Welsh buckler.

By the way, this was on a page that briefly described a study that the Royal Armoury made of the buckler. I believe that they concluded it originally had alternating rings of red and tin. It must have looked impressive when new.

Here's a link to the page about the investigation, in case anyone is interested:

http://www.royalarmouries.org/extsite/view.jsp?sectionId=3009

Check out this buckler:

---

 Attachment: 60.72 KB

Early 16th-century Welsh buckler.

Garth, I have seen both. The 16th century Italian buckler and 16th century target I have however both rolled over rod and then counter sunk.

As far as i know the edge can be rolled either way.

"Rolled in" is better for catching thrusts; very useful to break tempo in I.33 style play. I don't know how this applies to Rennaissance sword play though.

Martin's right. Surviving examples display all variations; rolled in, out or none.

Thanks for the help!
I really appreciate it!, I'll throw some pics up when there done. (be a couple months)